The use of endodontically treated and/or fiber post-retained teeth as abutments for fixed partial dentures
- 25 November 2011
- journal article
- Published by Springer Science and Business Media LLC in Clinical Oral Investigations
- Vol. 16 (5), 1485-1491
- https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-011-0635-7
Abstract
The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the effect of endodontic treatment with or without fiber-post restorations on the fracture strength of abutment teeth under fixed partial dentures (FPDs). Seventy extracted premolar and canine teeth were used. Groups of fiber-post-retained and root-filled teeth were endodontically treated. The teeth were embedded in an acrylic resin perpendicular to the horizontal plane to create fixed partial dentures. The following groups were created using different abutments: (1) sound (S) canine/S premolar, (2) S canine/endodontically treated (ET) premolar, (3) ET canine/S premolar, (4) ET canine/ET premolar, (5) S canine/fiber-post-restored (FPR) premolar, (6) FPR canine/S premolar, and (7) FPR canine/FPR premolar. Each tooth was prepared for a complete-coverage full-metal crown. Impressions were taken; metal frameworks were fabricated and cemented. The samples were exposed to 5,000 cycles of thermomechanical fatigue and loaded compressively until fracture (2 mm/min). The data were statistically analyzed using (Kruskal–Wallis test, α = 0.05). No significant difference was found among the mean fracture strengths of the groups (p = 0.696). There were distinct differences in failure patterns. All of the fracture types were horizontal, and neither vertical nor non-restorable root fractures were recorded. Premolars seemed to be a critical abutment compared to canines when they were sound under FPDs. The percentage of cervical fractures was high in endodontically treated teeth when compared to post-retained groups. In case of post-debonding, the abutment fracture did not occur. When root-filled teeth are used as abutments for FPDs, fiber-post restorations or the creation of abutments from similar structures (ET/ET or FPR/FPR) results in improved conservation of root structure under loading when compared to the abutments from different structures (S/ET, ET/S, FPR/S, S/FPR).Keywords
This publication has 48 references indexed in Scilit:
- Fracture resistance and failure modes of CEREC endo-crowns and conventional post and core-supported CEREC crownsJournal of Dental Sciences, 2009
- Fracture Resistance of Endodontically Treated Teeth: Three Walls versus Four Walls of Remaining Coronal Tooth StructureJournal of Prosthodontics, 2009
- Three-dimensional finite element analysis of strain and stress distributions in endodontically treated maxillary central incisors restored with diferent post, core and crown materialsDental Materials, 2007
- Fracture aperture, length and pattern geometry development under biaxial loading: a numerical study with applications to natural, cross-jointed systemsGeological Society, London, Special Publications, 2007
- In vitro fracture resistance and marginal adaptation of metallic and tooth‐coloured post systemsJournal of Oral Rehabilitation, 2004
- Comparison of mandibular premolars and canines with respect to their resistance to vertical root fractureJournal of Dentistry, 2004
- Micromorphology of the fiber post–resin core unit: a scanning electron microscopy evaluationDental Materials, 2004
- Factors Related to Loss of Root Canal Filled TeethJournal of Public Health Dentistry, 1997
- Survival rate and failure characteristics of the all metal post and core restorationJournal of Oral Rehabilitation, 1993
- Endodontically treated teeth as abutmentsThe Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 1985